To make high-quality research more accessible and easier to explore.

Fields:
15 results

Product market competition and corporate investment: Evidence from China

Journal of Corporate Finance 2015 35, 196-210
We find a positive relation between product market competition and corporate investment using a sample of Chinese manufacturing firms during 1999–2010. A quasi-natural experiment and change regressions yield consistent evidence. We postulate that China's high and predictable growth rate, as it transitions from a developing economy to a developed economy, is what drives the positive relation between competition and investment. We directly test and provide support for this growth-oriented explanation. We also find that high investment under high competition is a value-enhancing proposition for firms. Finally, we test whether some firm types are more likely to invest under high competition in a growing economy, and we find that firms with high predation risk and firms that are industry leaders invest more.

The costs (and benefits?) of diversified business groups: The case of Korean chaebols

Journal of Banking & Finance 2003 27(2), 251-273
We examine Korean chaebols to determine the costs and benefits associated with the operation of a diversified business group. We find that chaebol-affiliated firms suffer a value loss relative to non-affiliated firms. We observe that this value loss holds even after controlling for the relatedness of the diversification present within the chaebol. To identify the causes of this value loss, we obtain evidence suggesting that chaebol firms: (1) pursue profit stability rather than profit maximization, (2) over-invest in low performing industries, and (3) cross-subsidize the weaker members of their group. We do find however that chaebol firms possess greater debt capacity and consequently enjoy lower tax burdens. Nevertheless, because chaebols suffer an overall loss in value, we conclude that the costs associated with chaebol membership exceed its benefits.

Relationship-based debt financing of Chinese private sector firms: The role of social connections to banks versus political connections

Journal of Corporate Finance 2023 78, 102335
We study whether a firm's social connections to banks can augment its political connections to help it obtain loans. In China, Regulation No. 18 (announced in 2013) prohibits all high-level government officials from being independent directors of firms. As a result, many firms lost their political connections. We find that after firms lose their politically connected independent directors, firms having no social connections to banks experience, on average, a 12% decrease in the bank loan ratio relative to the median ratio; but those whose board chairs or CEOs are socially connected to local bank branch heads experience a 22% increase in the loan ratio relative to the median. However, this positive effect is short lived and thus not a new equilibrium. Overall, our findings support the hypothesis that a firm's social connections to banks can augment its political connections to help it get bank financing.

Price Limit Performance: Evidence from the Tokyo Stock Exchange

Journal of Finance 1997
Price limit advocates claim that price limits decrease stock price volatility, counter overreaction, and do not interfere with trading activity. Conversely, price limit critics claim that price limits cause higher volatility levels on subsequent days (volatility spillover hypothesis), prevent prices from efficiently reaching their equilibrium level (delayed price discovery hypothesis), and interfere with trading due to limitations imposed by price limits (trading interference hypothesis). Empirical research does not provide conclusive support for either positions. We examine the Tokyo Stock Exchange price limit system to test these hypotheses. Our evidence supports all three hypotheses suggesting that price limits may be ineffective.

Price Limit Performance: Evidence from the Tokyo Stock Exchange

Journal of Finance 1997 52(2), 885-901
ABSTRACT Price limit advocates claim that price limits decrease stock price volatility, counter overreaction, and do not interfere with trading activity. Conversely, price limit critics claim that price limits cause higher volatility levels on subsequent days (volatility spillover hypothesis), prevent prices from efficiently reaching their equilibrium level (delayed price discovery hypothesis), and interfere with trading due to limitations imposed by price limits (trading interference hypothesis). Empirical research does not provide conclusive support for either positions. We examine the Tokyo Stock Exchange price limit system to test these hypotheses. Our evidence supports all three hypotheses suggesting that price limits may be ineffective.